Can monaural temporal masking explain the ongoing precedence effect?

Freyman, Richard L.; Morse-Fortier, Charlotte; Griffin, Amanda M.; Zurek, Patrick M.

doi:10.1121/1.5024687

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

2018

DOI: 10.1121/1.5024687

|View full text |Cite

Can monaural temporal masking explain the ongoing precedence effect?

Richard L. Freyman¹,

Charlotte Morse-Fortier²,

Amanda M. Griffin³

et al.

Abstract: The precedence effect for transient sounds has been proposed to be based primarily on monaural processes, manifested by asymmetric temporal masking. This study explored the potential for monaural explanations with longer (“ongoing”) sounds exhibiting the precedence effect. Transient stimuli were single lead-lag noise burst pairs; ongoing stimuli were trains of 63 burst pairs. Unlike with transients, monaural masking data for ongoing sounds showed no advantage for the lead, and are inconsistent with asymmetric … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2019

2021

Publication Types

Select...

Article4

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent4

Authors

Journals

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have argued for contributions to echo suppression from more central processes, particularly for on-going sounds (Freyman et al., 2018). Even for transient sounds such as clicks, there is evidence for central contributions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Binaural Interaction Component of the Auditory Brainstem Response Under Precedence Effect Conditions

Dean

Grose

2020

Trends in Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to measure the binaural interaction component (BIC) derived from click-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) using stimuli configured to elicit the Precedence Effect. The hypothesis was that the contribution of binaural processing to echo suppression can be evidenced by a diminished or absent BIC associated with the echo. Ten normal-hearing young adults provided ABRs generated by sequences of click pairs. Results showed that BICs elicited by diotic clicks in isolation were obliterated when those diotic clicks were preceded by a click pair having an interaural time difference of 400 µs and where the interclick interval was 8.4 ms. The presence of the leading click pair increased the latency of the ABR generated by the lagging diotic click pair but did not decrease its amplitude. The results were interpreted as indicating a contribution of binaural processing at the level of the brainstem to echo suppression, at least for the conditions tested here.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Binaural Interaction Component of the Auditory Brainstem Response Under Precedence Effect Conditions

Dean

Grose

2020

Trends in Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Psychoacoustic evidence for stronger discrimination suppression of spatial information conveyed by lag-click interaural time than interaural level differences

Nilsson

Tirado

Szychowska

2019

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Listeners have limited access to spatial information in lagging sound, a phenomenon known as discrimination suppression. It is unclear whether discrimination suppression works differently for interaural time differences (ITDs) and interaural level differences (ILDs). To explore this, three listeners assessed the lateralization (left or right) and detection (present or not) of lag clicks with a large fixed ITD (350 μs) or ILD (10 dB) following a diotic lead click, with inter-click intervals (ICIs) of 0.125–256 ms. Performance was measured on a common scale for both cues: the lag–lead amplitude ratio [dB] at 75% correct answers. The main finding was that the lateralization thresholds, but not detection thresholds, were more strongly elevated for ITD-only than ILD-only clicks at intermediate ICIs (1–8 ms) in which previous research has found the strongest discrimination suppression effects. Altogether, these findings suggest that discrimination suppression involves mechanisms that make spatial information conveyed by lag-click ITDs less accessible to listeners than spatial information conveyed by lag-click ILDs.

show abstract

The impact of peripheral mechanisms on the precedence effect

Pastore

Braasch

2019

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When two similar sounds are presented from different locations, with one (the lead) preceding the other (the lag) by a small delay, listeners typically report hearing one sound near the location of the lead sound source—this is called the precedence effect (PE). Several questions about the underlying mechanisms that produce the PE are asked. (1) How might listeners' relative weighting of cues at onset versus ongoing stimulus portions affect perceived lateral position of long-duration lead/lag noise stimuli? (2) What are the factors that influence this weighting? (3) Are the mechanisms invoked to explain the PE for transient stimuli applicable to long-duration stimuli? To answer these questions, lead/lag noise stimuli are presented with a range of durations, onset slopes, and lag-to-lead level ratios over headphones. Monaural, peripheral mechanisms, and binaural cue extraction are modeled to estimate the cues available for determination of perceived laterality. Results showed that all three stimulus manipulations affect the relative weighting of onset and ongoing cues and that mechanisms invoked to explain the PE for transient stimuli are also applicable to the PE, in terms of both onset and ongoing segments of long-duration, lead/lag stimuli.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Can monaural temporal masking explain the ongoing precedence effect?

Cited by 4 publications

References 17 publications

The Binaural Interaction Component of the Auditory Brainstem Response Under Precedence Effect Conditions

The Binaural Interaction Component of the Auditory Brainstem Response Under Precedence Effect Conditions

Psychoacoustic evidence for stronger discrimination suppression of spatial information conveyed by lag-click interaural time than interaural level differences

The impact of peripheral mechanisms on the precedence effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About